\subsection{Communication}
Already under the definition phase of the project process we learned the importance of communication within the group. This made us set up and keep up a good documentation and communication platform where the main communication toke place.

Because we had to redefine our project mission we felt that we needed to prioritize the communication with our customer. We needed to get our suggestions approved by the customer while convincing them that it was the right move and still keep the balance of the customer-developer relation. Because of our close connection to our customer and our will to ask them for their opinions, we got them to still feel in control and that we were trustworthy. That may be a reason for why we got the permit to do the changes so smoothly. The communication with the customer especially helped us in the challenges that came from changing the project mission.  

Another lesson we can take from the project is that instead of trying to finish an entire requirements document for the first iteration we should have done a simple draft and waited for feedback from the supervisor. This would make it more possible for the supervisor to give us concrete feedback in a more flexible state of the project. And if it were a real project on the market you could do a quick checkup with the not so time-consuming draft to present it to the key stakeholders and getting early indications on whether or not you are getting them what they want. It could have helped our project in the delimitation process, which we could have gain much from later in the project. 

\subsection{The project process}
The project plan was as earlier mentioned not updated continuously trough the project. Working with a non updated version of the project plan gave first and foremost bigger challenges when it came to delimitation and time management. Having a good project plan is more important for the project to succeed than we estimated in the group and therefore did not focus enough on. 

Especially the not-so-updated time management gave us few chances to get a clear overview of the project’s scope and we could therefore not really see the signs of us taking on a too large scope early enough.

As mentioned in the description of the first iteration process we did not keep a structured continually iteration over all steps in the process (elicitation, specification, prioritization and validation). This made the project feel vulnerable because of lack of project dynamism. The cause to not prioritize the constant iterations was the too big scope, we were in a position where we hade to down prioritize the dynamics making the project comprehensible. The lessoned learned is that if the project is dynamic it is less vulnerable.
